18 U.S.C. § 1119

Foreign murder of United States nationals

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 18 CasesGoogle Scholar
(a)Definition.—In this section, “national of the United States” has the meaning stated in section 101(a)(22) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(22)).(b)Offense.—A person who, being a national of the United States, kills or attempts to kill a national of the United States while such national is outside the United States but within the jurisdiction of another country shall be punished as provided under sections 1111, 1112, and 1113.(c)Limitations on Prosecution.—(1) No prosecution may be instituted against any person under this section except upon the written approval of the Attorney General, the Deputy Attorney General, or an Assistant Attorney General, which function of approving prosecutions may not be delegated. No prosecution shall be approved if prosecution has been previously undertaken by a foreign country for the same conduct.(2) No prosecution shall be approved under this section unless the Attorney General, in consultation with the Secretary of State, determines that the conduct took place in a country in which the person is no longer present, and the country lacks the ability to lawfully secure the person’s return. A determination by the Attorney General under this paragraph is not subject to judicial review.(Added Pub. L. 103–322, title VI, § 60009(a), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 1972.)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 15 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1997–2026 · leading case: United States v. Wharton, 320 F.3d 526 (5th Cir. 2003).
United States v. Wharton, 320 F.3d 526 (5th Cir. 2003). · cites it 10× “RESTANI, Judge: Appellant Curtis Wharton (“Defendant”) appeals his conviction for (1) the foreign murder of a United States national in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1119 ; (2) conspiracy to kill in a foreign country in violation of 18 U.”
New York Times Co. v. United States Deparment of Just., 756 F.3d 100 (2d Cir. 2014). · cites it 5× “Part 11(A) considers Title 18 U.S.C. § 1119 (2013), entitled “Foreign murder of United States nationals” and explains why section 1119 does not proscribe killings covered by a traditionally recognized justification.”
United States v. Hughes, 211 F.3d 676 (1st Cir. 2000). · cites it 3× “2(c)(l) is superceded by 18 U.S.C. § 1119 ; (B) there was insufficient evidence of first degree murder; and (C) McCarthy was not “a victim” of the extortion scheme within the meaning of § 2B3.”
United States v. Ali Abdulatif Karaouni, AKA Ali Abdelatif Karaouni, 379 F.3d 1139 (9th Cir. 2004). “§ 1015 (e) (establishing that it is a crime for an alien to knowingly make “any false statement or claim that he is, or at any time has been, a citizen or national of the United States, with the intent to obtain on behalf of himself, or any other person, any Federal or State…”
United States v. Polizzi, 549 F. Supp. 2d 308 (E.D.N.Y 2008). “§ 1118 Murder in a federal correctional facility by inmate sen- Death or life tenced to a term of life imprisonment *490 18 U.S.C. § 1119 (b) First degree murder of a U.”
New York Times Co. v. United States Dep't of Just., 915 F. Supp. 2d 508 (S.D.N.Y. 2013). “One such constraint might be found in 18 U.S.C. § 1119 , which is enti *524 tied “Foreign murder of United States nationals.”
Am. Civil Liberties Union v. Cent. Intelligence Agency, 109 F. Supp. 3d 220 (D.D.C. 2015). “ACLU argues that CIA has waived its FOIA exemptions as to some of the withheld legal memoranda, or portions thereof, because the government has already disclosed its analysis of 18 U.S.C. § 1119 (the statute that makes it a crime for “a national of the United States, [to] kill […”
New York Times Co. v. United States Dep't of Just., 752 F.3d 123 (2d Cir. 2014). “The 16-page, single-spaced DOJ White Paper [redacted] in its analysis of the lawfulness of targeted killings, [redacted] The DOJ White Paper explains why targeted killings do not violate 18 U.S.C. §§ 1119 or 2441, or the Fourth and Fifth Amendments to the Constitution, and…”
United States v. White, 51 F. Supp. 2d 1008 (E.D. Cal. 1997). · cites it 3× “Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction Defendant argues that the Court should dismiss the indictment for lack of jurisdiction on the following grounds: 1) that Congress was without authority to enact 18 U.S.C. § 1119 ; 2) that prosecuting Defendant under this statute denies…”
Alvarez-Machain v. United States, 331 F.3d 604 (9th Cir. 2003). “, 18 U.S.C. § 1119 (murder of U.S. national in a foreign country); 18 U.”
United States v. Nipper, 198 F. Supp. 2d 818 (W.D. La. 2002). · cites it 2× “Nipper’s (“Nipper”) Motion for Disclosure of Grounds for Determination that 18 U.S.C. § 1119 (c)(2) Exclusion Does Not Apply (“Motion for Disclosure”) [Doc.”
Eur. Cmty. v. RJR Nabisco, Inc., 783 F.3d 123 (2d Cir. 2015). “See 18 U.S.C. § 1119 (stating that United States national who "kills or attempts to kill a national of the United States while such national is outside the.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.